Way too early to judge the Crawford signing, and he's far from a bust anyways.

Dice K wasn't worth the money, but had he not gotten hurt, he'd have more wins than losses. He isn't high on the list of successes, but he's no where close to rentaria. Not worth the money is a lot different from bust.

Lackey - not a great signing. If he gets traded and the Sox end up paying most of his salary, then yeah, it will rank close to Renteria.

I think to answer that you have to use some sort of objective measurement-actual dollars paid vs. some sort of valuation like FanGraphs or whatever one you prefer. Crawford certainly looks like a potential major bust but you can't calculate anything based on a few months of a 7 year deal. I may be wrong (I was with Papi vs LHPs), but I think we can calculate after 9 seasons of horrible numbers vs LHPs, that Crawford is nothing more than a glorified platoon player that plays FT because of his $142M deal.Posted by moonslav59

Crawford had bad numbers against lefties in 2010 but was still valued at 7.5 WAR by FanGraphs and 5.6 WAR by Baseball-Reference. That's what I mean about using some sort of objective measurement of the player's total value.

Carl Crawford, hands down.20 million for SEVEN years for an average player, who has the yips playing in Fenway. Manny in his prime money for a fraction of the production.Does anyone pay to watch Carl Crawford? Where was this money when Matt Holiday was avaiable? Surely a much better fit on this team and in this park.THE worst contract the Sox ever made.Has anyone noticed that Don Orsillo can't pronounce Crawford's name?Craul Crafud.

As bad as Lugo was he still hit .237 in 2007, .280 in 2008 and .284 in 2009. Right up there with the disasterous Cameron deal I'd put the Smoltz and Gagne signings. I can't see that those three gave us anything.

Hard for me to see cameron in the same light as some of these other busts. 2 years at 14, while not chump change by any measure, isn't disastrous. It didn't hurt any spending flexibility for the club. It definitely was a bet-hedging contract in case what could go wrong, went wrong. And it did. But its not a bust per se, because I don;t think there was as much expectation built in compared to some of these other names. I think there has to be high expectation to make someone a bust.

Calling Carl Crawford or anyone who hasn't even played a half season yet a bust is pretty ignorant.Posted by LloydDobler

remember to post me in a couple of years and apologize for calling me ignorant.at the same time, if i feel that CRAWFORD isn't a bust and is worth 21 million/year, i will admit i was ignorant.somehow i feel there will be an apology coming.